We stated in the
introduction that
Calvinism has its roots in the views of St. Augustine. This man was
also
largely responsible for the acceptance of a-millennialism into
mainstream
Christianity, and the Roman Catholic doctrine that the Catholic Church
is now God's Kingdom on earth. Prior to his conversion in the fourth
century,
Augustine was heavily involved in a pseudo-Christian Gnostic cult that
held heretical ideas regarding the nature of God as well as the person
of Christ. All of the Gnostic cultists were heavily influenced by the
writings
of the Greek philosophers. And Augustine was no exception.

Fate vs.
Free Will
Throughout Church History

Historical
Period

Free
WillGod's grace
is given to all who submit willingly

FateEach man's
destiny is predetermined

I. First through
Fourth Centuries

All Christian
Writers

Gnostic Cults,
Greek Philosophers,
Pantheists, Buddhists

II. Fifth through
Fourteenth Centuries

Most Christian
Writers, Catholics,
Orthodox

St. Augustine
& some
later Christian writers, Waldenses, Moslems, Buddhists

III. Fifteenth
through Twentieth
Centuries

Arminians,
Wesleyans, most Baptists,
Catholics (Jesuit), Orthodox

Calvinists
(Reformed), Catholics
(Dominican), Moslems, Buddhists

Prior to the writings of
Augustine,
the Church universally held that mankind had a totally free will. Each
man was responsible before God to accept the Gospel. His ultimate
destiny,
while fully dependent on God's grace and power, was also dependent on
his
free choice to submit to or reject God's grace and power. In the three
centuries from the Apostles to Augustine the early Church held to NONE
of the five points of Calvinism, not one. The writings of the orthodox
Church, for the first three centuries, are in stark contrast to the
ideas
of Augustine and Calvin. Man is fully responsible for his choice to
respond
to or reject the Gospel. This was considered to be the Apostolic
doctrine
passed down through the local church elders ordained by the Apostles,
and
their successors. Below we have listed a few representative quotes from
the earlier writers in order to give the flavor of the earliest
tradition
regarding election and free will. Some deal with the subject of
perseverance
and apostasy.

Clement of Rome
(AD30-100)"On account of his
hospitality
and godliness, Lot was saved out of Sodom when all the country round
was
punished by means of fire and brimstone, the Lord thus making it
manifest
that He does not forsake those that hope in Him, but gives up such as
depart
from Him to punishment and torture. For Lot’s wife, who went forth with
him, being of a different mind from himself and not continuing in
agreement
with him [as to the command which had been given them], was made an
example
of, so as to be a pillar of salt unto this day. This was done that all
might know that those who are of a double mind, and who distrust the
power
of God, bring down judgment on themselves? and become a sign to all
succeeding
generations." (Clement, Epistle to the Corinthians, XI)

Ignatius (AD30-107)"Seeing, then, all things
have
an end, and there is set before us life upon our observance [of God’s
precepts],
but death as the result of disobedience, and every one, according to
the
choice he makes, shall go to his own place, let us flee from death, and
make choice of life. For I remark, that two different characters are
found
among men — the one true coin, the other spurious. The truly devout man
is the right kind of coin, stamped by God Himself. The ungodly man,
again,
is false coin, unlawful, spurious, counterfeit, wrought not by God, but
by the devil. I do not mean to say that there are two different human
natures,
but that there is one humanity, sometimes belonging to God, and
sometimes
to the devil. If any one is truly religious, he is a man of God; but if
he is irreligious, he is a man of the devil, made such, not by nature,
but by his own choice. The unbelieving bear the image of the prince of
wickedness. The believing possess the image of their Prince, God the
Father,
and Jesus Christ, through whom, if we are not in readiness to die for
the
truth into His passion, His life is not in us." (Ignatius, Epistle
to the Magnesians, V)

Barnabas (AD100)"The Lord will judge the
world
without respect of persons. Each will receive as he has done: if he is
righteous, his righteousness will precede him; if he is wicked, the
reward
of wickedness is before him. Take heed, lest resting at our ease, as
those
who are the called [of God], we should fall asleep in our sins, and the
wicked prince, acquiring power over us, should thrust us away from the
kingdom of the Lord. And all the more attend to this, my brethren, when
ye reflect and behold, that after so great signs and wonders were
wrought
in Israel, they were thus [at length] abandoned. Let us beware lest we
be found [fulfilling that saying], as it is written, “Many are called,
but few are chosen.” (Epistle of Barnabas, IV)

Justin Martyr (AD
110-165)"But lest some suppose,
from
what has been said by us, that we say that whatever happens, happens by
a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too
we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be
true,
that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered
according
to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all
things
happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it
be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is
the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless
the
human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free
choice,
they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be.
But
that it is by free choice they both walk uprightly and stumble, we thus
demonstrate. We see the same man making a transition to opposite
things.
Now, if it had been fated that he were to be either good or bad, he
could
never have been capable of both the opposites, nor of so many
transitions.
But not even would some be good and others bad, since we thus make fate
the cause of evil, and exhibit her as acting in opposition to herself;
or that which has been already stated would seem to be true, that
neither
virtue nor vice is anything, but that things are only reckoned good or
evil by opinion; which, as the true word shows, is the greatest impiety
and wickedness. But this we assert is inevitable fate, that they who
choose
the good have worthy rewards, and they who choose the opposite have
their
merited awards. For not like other things, as trees and quadrupeds,
which
cannot act by choice, did God make man: for neither would he be worthy
of reward or praise did he not of himself choose the good, but were
created
for this end; nor, if he were evil, would he be worthy of punishment,
not
being evil of himself, but being able to be nothing else than what he
was
made." (Justin, First Apology, XLIII)

"For so we say that
there will
be the conflagration, but not as the Stoics, according to their
doctrine
of all things being changed into one another, which seems most
degrading.
But neither do we affirm that it is by fate that men do what they do,
or
suffer what they suffer, but that each man by free choice acts rightly
or sins; and that it is by the influence of the wicked demons that
earnest
men, such as Socrates and the like, suffer persecution and are in
bonds,
while Sardanapalus, Epicurus, and the like, seem to be blessed in
abundance
and glory. The Stoics, not observing this, maintained that all things
take
place according to the necessity of fate. But since God in the
beginning
made the race of angels and men with free-will, they will justly suffer
in eternal fire the punishment of whatever sins they have committed.
and
this is the nature of all that is made, to be capable of vice and
virtue.
For neither would any of them be praiseworthy unless there were power
to
turn to both (virtue and vice). And this also is shown by those men
everywhere
who have made laws and philosophized according to right reason, by
their
prescribing to do some things and refrain from others. Even the Stoic
philosophers,
in their doctrine of morals, steadily honour the same things, so that
it
is evident that they are not very felicitious in what they say about
principles
and incorporeal things. For if they say that human actions come to pass
by fate, they will maintain either that God is nothing else than the
things
which are ever turning, and altering, and dissolving into the same
things,
and will appear to have had a comprehension only of things that are
destructable,
and to have looked on God Himself as emerging both in part and in whole
in every wickedness; or that neither vice or virtue is anything; which
is contrary to every sound idea, reason, and sense."
(Justin Second Apology, VII)

"Could not God have
cut off in
the beginning the serpent, so that he exist not, rather than have said,
‘And I will put enmity between him and the woman, and between his seed
and her seed?’ Could He not have at once created a multitude of men?
But
yet, since He knew that it would be good, He created both angels and
men
free to do that which is righteous, and He appointed periods of time
during
which He knew it would be good for them to have the exercise of
free-will;
and because He likewise knew it would be good, He made general and
particular
judgments; each one’s freedom of will, however, being guarded."
(Justin,
Dialogue with Trypho, 102)

"I said briefly by
anticipation,
that God, wishing men and angels to follow His will, resolved to create
them free to do righteousness; possessing reason, that they may know by
whom they are created, and through whom they, not existing formerly, do
now exist; and with a law that they should be judged by Him, if they do
anything contrary to right reason: and of ourselves we, men and angels,
shall be convicted of having acted sinfully, unless we repent
beforehand.
But if the word of God foretells that some angels and men shall be
certainly
punished, it did so because it foreknew that they would be unchangeably
[wicked], but not because God had created them so. So that if they
repent,
all who wish for it can obtain mercy from God: and the Scripture
foretells
that they shall be blessed, saying, ‘Blessed is the man to whom the
Lord
imputeth not sin;’ that is, having repented of his sins, that he may
receive
remission of them from God; and not as you deceive yourselves, and some
others who resemble you in this, who say, that even though they be
sinners,
but know God, the Lord will not impute sin to them." (Justin,
Dialogue
with Trypho, 141)

"Here, then, is a
proof of virtue,
and of a mind loving prudence, to recur to the communion of the unity,
and to attach one’s self to prudence for salvation, and make choice of
the better things according to the free-will placed in man; and not to
think that those who are possessed of human passions are lords of all,
when they shall not appear to have even equal power with men." (Justin,
On the Sole Government of God, VI)

Irenaeus (AD120-202)"This expression [of our
Lord],
“How often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou
wouldest
not,” set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man
a free [agent] from the beginning, possessing his own power, even as he
does his own soul, to obey the behests (ad utendum sententia) of God
voluntarily,
and not by compulsion of God. For there is no coercion with God, but a
good will [towards us] is present with Him continually. And therefore
does
He give good counsel to all. And in man, as well as in angels, He has
placed
the power of choice (for angels are rational beings), so that those who
had yielded obedience might justly possess what is good, given indeed
by
God, but preserved by themselves. On the other hand, they who have not
obeyed shall, with justice, be not found in possession of the good, and
shall receive condign punishment: for God did kindly bestow on them
what
was good; but they themselves did not diligently keep it, nor deem it
something
precious, but poured contempt upon His super-eminent goodness.
Rejecting
therefore the good, and as it were spuing it out, they shall all
deservedly
incur the just judgment of God, which also the Apostle Paul testifies
in
his Epistle to the Romans, where he says, “But dost thou despise the
riches
of His goodness, and patience, and long-suffering, being ignorant that
the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But according to thy
hardness
and impenitent heart, thou treasurest to thyself wrath against the day
of wrath, and the revelation of the righteous judgment of God.” “But
glory
and honor,” he says, “to every one that doeth good.” God therefore has
given that which is good, as the apostle tells us in this Epistle, and
they who work it shall receive glory and honor, because they have done
that which is good when they had it in their power not to do it; but
those
who do it not shall receive the just judgment of God, because they did
not work good when they had it in their power so to do.

"But if some had been
made by
nature bad, and others good, these latter would not be deserving of
praise
for being good, for such were they created; nor would the former be
reprehensible,
for thus they were made [originally]. But since all men are of the same
nature, able both to hold fast and to do what is good; and, on the
other
hand, having also the power to cast it from them and not to do it, —
some
do justly receive praise even among men who are under the control of
good
laws (and much more from God), and obtain deserved testimony of their
choice
of good in general, and of persevering therein; but the others are
blamed,
and receive a just condemnation, because of their rejection of what is
fair and good. And therefore the prophets used to exhort men to what
was
good, to act justly and to work righteousness, as I have so largely
demonstrated,
because it is in our power so to do, and because by excessive
negligence
we might become forgetful, and thus stand in need of that good counsel
which the good God has given us to know by means of the prophets. ...
No
doubt, if any one is unwilling to follow the Gospel itself, it is in
his
power [to reject it], but it is not expedient. For it is in man’s power
to disobey God, and to forfeit what is good; but [such conduct] brings
no small amount of injury and mischief. ... But because man is
possessed
of free will from the beginning, and God is possessed of free will, in
whose likeness man was created, advice is always given to him to keep
fast
the good, which thing is done by means of obedience to God.

"And not merely in
works, but
also in faith, has God preserved the will of man free and under his own
control, saying, “According to thy faith be it unto thee; “ thus
showing
that there is a faith specially belonging to man, since he has an
opinion
specially his own. And again, “All things are possible to him that
believeth;”
and, “Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee.”
Now all such expressions demonstrate that man is in his own power with
respect to faith. And for this reason, “he that believeth in Him has
eternal
life while he who believeth not the Son hath not eternal life, but the
wrath of God shall remain upon him.” In the same manner therefore the
Lord,
both showing His own goodness, and indicating that man is in his own
free
will and his own power, said to Jerusalem, “How often have I wished to
gather thy children together, as a hen [gathereth] her chickens under
her
wings, and ye would not! Wherefore your house shall be left unto you
desolate.”"
(Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Bk. IV, 37)

The above passage is
immediately
followed by Irenaeus' refutation of the Gnostic cults who "maintain
the opposite to these conclusions."

"Has the Word come for
the ruin
and for the resurrection of many? For the ruin, certainly, of those who
do not believe Him, to whom also He has threatened a greater damnation
in the judgment-day than that of Sodom and Gomorrah; but for the
resurrection
of believers, and those who do the will of His Father in heaven. If
then
the advent of the Son comes indeed alike to all, but is for the purpose
of judging, and separating the believing from the unbelieving, since,
as
those who believe do His will agreeably to their own choice, and as,
[also]
agreeably to their own choice, the disobedient do not consent to His
doctrine;
it is manifest that His Father has made all in a like condition, each
person
having a choice of his own, and a free understanding; and that He has
regard
to all things, and exercises a providence over all, "making His sun to
rise upon the evil and on the good, and sending rain upon the just and
unjust."

"And to as many as
continue in
their love towards God, does He grant communion with Him. But communion
with God is life and light, and the enjoyment of all the benefits which
He has in store. But on as many as, according to their own choice,
depart
from God, He inflicts that separation from Himself which they have
chosen
of their own accord. But separation from God is death, and separation
from
light is darkness; and separation from God consists in the loss of all
the benefits which He has in store. Those, therefore, who cast away by
apostasy these forementioned things, being in fact destitute of all
good,
do experience every kind of punishment. God, however, does not punish
them
immediately of Himself, but that punishment falls upon them because
they
are destitute of all that is good. Now, good things are eternal and
without
end with God, and therefore the loss of these is also eternal and
never-ending.
It is in this matter just as occurs in the case of a flood of light:
those
who have blinded themselves, or have been blinded by others, are for
ever
deprived of the enjoyment of light. It is not, [however], that the
light
has inflicted upon them the penalty of blindness, but it is that the
blindness
itself has brought calamity upon them: and therefore the Lord declared,
"He that believeth in Me is not condemned," that is, is not separated
from
God, for he is united to God through faith. On the other hand, He says,
"He that believeth not is condemned already, because he has not
believed
in the name of the only-begotten Son of God;" that is, he separated
himself
from God of his own accord. "For this is the condemnation, that light
is
come into this world, and men have loved darkness rather than light.
For
every one who doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light,
lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to
the
light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that he has wrought them in
God." (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Bk. V, XXVII)

<>Tatian (AD110-172)"Why are you fated to
grasp at
things often, and often to die? Die to the world, repudiating the
madness
that is in it. Live to God, and by apprehending Him lay aside your old
nature. We were not created to die, but we die by our own fault. Our
free-will
has destroyed us; we who were free have become slaves; we have been
sold
through sin. Nothing evil has been created by God; we Ourselves have
manifested
wickedness; but we, who have manifested it, are able again to reject
it."
(Tatian, Address to the Greeks, XI)

Tertullian (AD145-220)"Moreover, man thus
constituted
will be protected by both the goodness of God and by His purpose, both
of which are always found in concert in our God. For His purpose is no
purpose without goodness; nor is His goodness without a purpose, except
forsooth in the case of Marcion’s God, who is purposelessly good, as we
have shown. Well, then, it was proper that God should be known; it was
no doubt a good and reasonable thing. Proper also was it that there
should
be something worthy of knowing God. What could be found so worthy as
the
image and likeness of God? This also was undoubtedly good and
reasonable.
Therefore it was proper that (he who is) the image and likeness of God
should be formed with a free will and a mastery of himself; so that
this
very thing — namely, freedom of will and self-command — might be
reckoned
as the image and likeness of God in him. For this purpose such an
essence
was adapted to man as suited this character, even the afflatus of the
Deity,
Himself free and uncontrolled. But if you will take some other view of
the case, how came it to pass that man, when in possession of the whole
world, did not above all things reign in self-possession — a master
over
others, a slave to himself? The goodness of God, then, you can learn
from
His gracious gift to man, and His purpose from His disposal of all
things.
At present, let God’s goodness alone occupy our attention, that which
gave
so large a gift to man, even the liberty of his will. God’s purpose
claims
some other opportunity of treatment, offering as it does instruction of
like import. Now, God alone is good by nature. For He, who has that
which
is without beginning, has it not by creation, but by nature. Man,
however,
who exists entirely by creation, having a beginning, along with that
beginning
obtained the form in which he exists; and thus he is not by nature
disposed
to good, but by creation, not having it as his own attribute to be
good,
because, (as we have said,) it is not by nature, but by creation, that
he is disposed to good, according to the appointment of his good
Creator,
even the Author of all good. In order, therefore, that man might have a
goodness of his own, bestowed on him by God, and there might be
henceforth
in man a property, and in a certain sense a natural attribute of
goodness,
there was assigned to him in the constitution of his nature, as a
formal
witness of the goodness which God bestowed upon him, freedom and power
of the will, such as should cause good to be performed spontaneously by
man, as a property of his own, on the ground that no less than this
would
be required in the matter of a goodness which was to be voluntarily
exercised
by him, that is to say, by the liberty of his will, without either
favor
or servility to the constitution of his nature, so that man should be
good
just up to this point, if he should display his goodness in accordance
with his natural constitution indeed, but still as the result of his
will,
as a property of his nature; and, by a similar exercise of volition,
should
show himself to be too strong in defense against evil also (for even
this
God, of course, foresaw), being free, and master of himself; because,
if
he were wanting in this prerogative of self-mastery, so as to perform
even
good by necessity and not will, he would, in the helplessness of his
servitude,
become subject to the usurpation of evil, a slave as much to evil as to
good. Entire freedom of will, therefore, was conferred upon him in both
tendencies; so that, as master of himself, he might constantly
encounter
good by spontaneous observance of it, and evil by its spontaneous
avoidance;
because, were man even otherwise circumstanced, it was yet his bounden
duty, in the judgment of God, to do justice according to the motions of
his will regarded, of course, as free. But the reward neither of good
nor
of evil could be paid to the man who should be found to have been
either
good or evil through necessity and not choice. In this really lay the
law
which did not exclude, but rather prove, human liberty by a spontaneous
rendering of obedience, or a spontaneous commission of iniquity; so
patent
was the liberty of man’s will for either issue. Since, therefore, both
the goodness and purpose of God are discovered in the gift to man of
freedom
in his will, it is not right, after ignoring the original definition of
goodness and purpose which it was necessary to determine previous to
any
discussion of the subject, on subsequent facts to presume to say that
God
ought not in such a way to have formed man, because the issue was other
than what was assumed to be proper for God. We ought rather, after duly
considering that it behooved God so to create man, to leave this
consideration
unimpaired, and to survey the other aspects of the case. It is, no
doubt,
an easy process for persons who take offence at the fall of man, before
they have looked into the facts of his creation, to impute the blame of
what happened to the Creator, without any examination of His purpose.
To
conclude: the goodness of God, then fully considered from the beginning
of His works, will be enough to convince us that nothing evil could
possibly
have come forth from God; and the liberty of man will, after a second
thought,
show us that it alone is chargeable with the fault which itself
committed."
(Tertullian, Against Marcion, Bk. II, ch. vi)

"God put the question [to
Adam - "where art thou"] with an appearance of uncertainty, in order
that even here He might prove man to be the subject of a free will in
the
alternative of either a denial or a confession, and give to him the
opportunity
of freely acknowledging his transgression, and, so far, of lightening
it.
In like manner He inquires of Cain where his brother was, just as if He
had not yet heard the blood of Abel crying from the ground, in order
that
he too might have the opportunity from the same power of the will of
spontaneously
denying, and to this degree aggravating, his crime; and that thus there
might be supplied to us examples of confessing sins rather than of
denying
them: so that even then was initiated the evangelic doctrine, “By thy
words
thou shall be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.”
(Tertullian, Against Marcion, Bk. II, xxv)

"That rich man did go
his way
who had not “received” the precept of dividing his substance to the
needy,
and was abandoned by the Lord to his own opinion. Nor will “harshness”
be on this account imputed to Christ, the Found of the vicious action
of
each individual free-will. “Behold,” saith He, “I have set before thee
good and evil.” Choose that which is good: if you cannot, because you
will
not — for that you can if you will He has shown, because He has
proposed
each to your free-will — you ought to depart from Him whose will you do
not." (Tertullian, On Monogamy, XIV)

Clement of Alexandria
(AD153-217)"God, then, is good. And
the
Lord speaks many a time and oft before He proceeds to act. ... For the
Divine Being is not angry in the way that some think; but often
restrains,
and always exhorts humanity, and shows what ought to be done. And this
is a good device, to terrify lest we sin. “For the fear of the Lord
drives
away sins, and he that is without fear cannot be justified,” says the
Scripture.
And God does not inflict punishment from wrath, but for the ends of
justice;
since it is not expedient that justice should be neglected on our
account.
Each one of us, who sins, with his own free-will chooses punishment,
and
the blame lies with him who chooses. God is without blame. “But if our
unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is
God unrighteous, who taketh vengeance? God forbid.” ... It is clear,
then,
that those who are not at enmity with the truth, and do not hate the
Word,
will not hate their own salvation, but will escape the punishment of
enmity.
“The crown of wisdom,” then as the book of Wisdom says, “is the fear of
the Lord.” Very clearly, therefore, by the prophet Amos has the Lord
unfolded
His method of dealing, saying, “I have overthrown you, as God overthrew
Sodom and Gomorrah; and ye shall be as a brand plucked from the fire:
and
yet ye have not returned unto me, saith the LORD.” See how God, through
His love of goodness, seeks repentance; and by means of the plan He
pursues
of threatening silently, shows His own love for man. “I will avert,” He
says, “My face from them, and show what shall happen to them.” For
where
the face of the Lord looks, there is peace and rejoicing; but where it
is averted, there is the introduction of evil. The Lord, accordingly,
does
not wish to look on evil things; for He is good. But on His looking
away,
evil arises spontaneously through human unbelief. “Behold, therefore,”
says Paul, “the goodness and severity of God: on them that fell
severity;
but upon thee, goodness, if thou continue in His goodness,” that is, in
faith in Christ." (Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, Bk. I,
viii)

Origen (AD185-254)"This also is clearly
defined
in the teaching of the Church, that every rational soul is possessed of
free-will and volition; that it has a stuggle to maintain with the
devil
and his angels, and opposing influences, because they strive to burden
it with sins; but if we live rightly and wisely, we should endeavor to
shake ourselves free of a burden of that kind. From which it follows,
also,
that we understand ourselves not to be subject to necessity, so as to
be
compelled by all means, even against our will, to do either good or
evil.
For if we are our own masters, some influences perhaps may impel us to
sin, and others help us to salvation; we are not forced, however, by
any
necessity either to act rightly or wrongly, which those persons think
is
the case who say that the courses and movements of the stars are the
cause
of human actions, not only of those which take place beyond the
influence
of the freedom of the will, but also of those which are placed within
our
own power." (Origen, De Principis, Preface)

"And for this reason
we think
that God, the Father of all things, in order to ensure the salvation of
all His creatures through the ineffable plan of His word and wisdom, so
arranged each of these, that every spirit, whether soul or rational
existence,
however called, should not be compelled by force, against the liberty
of
his own will, to any other course than that to which the motives of his
own mind led him (lest by so doing the power of exercising free-will
should
seem to be taken away, which certainly would produce a change in the
nature
of the being itself); and that the varying purposes of these would be
suitably
and usefully adapted to the harmony of one world, by some of them
requiring
help, and others being able to give it, and others again being the
cause
of struggle and contest to those who are making progress, amongst whom
their diligence would be deemed more worthy of approval, and the place
of rank obtained after victory be held with greater certainty, which
should
be established by the difficulties of the contest." (Origen, Bk. II
ch. I)

Hippolytus (AD170-236)"But man, from the fact
of his
possessing a capacity of self-determination, brings forth what is evil,
that is, accidentally; which evil is not consummated except you
actually
commit some piece of wickedness. For it is in regard of our desiring
anything
that is wicked, or our meditating upon it, that what is evil is so
denominated.
Evil had no existence from the beginning, but came into being
subsequently.
Since man has free will, a law has been defined for his guidance by the
Deity, not without answering a good purpose. For if man did not possess
the power to will and not to will, why should a law be established? For
a law will not be laid down for an animal devoid of reason, but a
bridle
and a whip; whereas to man has been given a precept and penalty to
perform,
or for not carrying into execution what has been enjoined. For man thus
constituted has a law been enacted by just men in primitive ages."
(Hippolytus, Against all Heresies, Bk. X, ch. xxix)

Novatian (AD210-280)"And lest, again, an
unbounded
freedom should fall into peril, He laid down a command, in which man
was
taught that there was no evil in the fruit of the tree; but he was
forewarned
that evil would arise if perchance he should exercise his free will, in
the contempt of thelaw that was given. For,
on the
one hand, it had behooved him to be free, lest the image of God should,
unfittingly be in bondage; and on the other, the law was to be added,
so
that an unbridled liberty might not break forth even to a contempt of
the
Giver. So that he might receive as a consequence both worthy rewards
and
a deserved punishment, having in his own power that which he might
choose
to do, by the tendency of his mind in either direction: whence,
therefore,
by envy, mortality comes back upon him; seeing that, although he might
escape it by obedience, he rushes into it by hurrying to be God under
the
influence of perverse counsel." (Novatian, Trinity, ch. I)

Archelaus (AD277)"This account also
indicates
that rational creatures have been entrusted with free-will, in virtue
of
which they also admit of conversions." ... "For all the creatures that
God made, He made very good; and He gave to every individual the sense
of free-will, in accordance with which standard He also instituted the
law of judgment. To sin is ours, and that we sin not is God’s gift, as
our will is constituted to choose either to sin or not to sin. ... The
judges said: He has given demonstration enough of the origin of the
devil.
And as both sides admit that there will be a judgment, it is
necessarily
involved in that admission that every individual is shown to have
free-will;
and since this is brought clearly out, there can be no doubt that every
individual, in the exercise of his own proper power of will, may shape
his course in whatever direction he pleases." (Archelaus, The Acts
of the Disputation)

Alexander of
Alexandria (AD273-326)"I will endeavor, with
your assistance
and favor, to examine carefully the position of those who are offended,
and deny that we speak the truth, when we say that man is possessed of
free-will, and prove that “They perish self-destroyed, By their own
fault,”
choosing the pleasant in preference to the expedient." (Alexander,
Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse VIII, ch. xii)

Lactantius (AD260-330)"When, therefore, the
number
of men had begun to increase, God in His forethought, lest the devil,
to
whom from the beginning He had given power over the earth, should by
his
subtilty either corrupt or destroy men, as he had done at first, sent
angels
for the protection and improvement of the human race; and inasmuch as
He
had given these a free will, He enjoined them above all things not to
defile
themselves with contamination from the earth, and thus lose the dignity
of their heavenly nature." (Lactantius, Divine Institutes, Bk. II,
ch. xv)

There seems to have been
no exceptions
among early Christian writers to the orthodox teaching that man has
been
granted by God a free will to choose his destiny, and that salvation is
available to all. The opposing view, that man is controlled by fate,
could
only be found in the Greek philosophical schools, Gnosticism, and
Eastern
mysticism during the first 300 years of Christianity. It is no wonder
that
the man who introduced Greek fatalism into Christianity should come
from
a Gnostic and Neo-Platonic background. Augustine's theory differed from
the Greek philosophers mainly by naming the CAUSE of fate — God's
mysterious
will which must not be questioned, and cannot be understood by mortals.
The impact of Augustine's teaching probably would not have been nearly
so great if Pelagius had not gone to the opposite extreme in renouncing
Augustine.

While those of the
Reformed persuasion
are right to reject the Latin heresies of Rome, they have been lax to
recognize
the Greek heresies introduced before the Latin era, which are equally
contrary
to the truth of the Christian Faith "once for all delivered to the
saints"
by the Apostles of Jesus Christ. They seem to hold a higher opinion of
philosophers, like Augustine, than of the Apostles themselves, and
those
to whom the Apostles entrusted the Apostolic tradition.